Australia Australia - William Tyrrell Disappeared While Playing in Yard - Kendall (NSW) #79

[SouthAussie]

When seeing the photos of little W and sis on the deck in Kendall, something is indeed baffling: FFC wanted to document the bio sibling's life for the (same) bio parents and the children themselves as requested by the Children Welfare organisation. On the known photos there is slightly bad mooded W always in the front and his peaceful bio sister in the background. - Short time after taking photos, exactly that child in the front (quasi the main person) has disappeared from the earth's surface.

I have never understood why people say William was bad mooded. He was playing a game. He was being a 3 year old.

A little 3 year old in my family (close to 3½ to be precise) is often being a dinosaur. She isn't being bad mooded when she 'roars' and extends her fingers like 'dinosaur claws'. Nobody else is even playing her game with her. She just does it when she feels like it. She thinks it is funny, and likes it.

I think sometimes people forget how a 3 year old plays. Or maybe their 3 year old didn't play in a similar way.
Our 3 year old is also now growing long and lean, unlike her recent chubby toddler face. Not being starved or maltreated. I see a lot of her, and know this.

imo

 

[Chrissy74]

I have never understood why people say William was bad mooded. He was playing a game. He was being a 3 year old.

A little 3 year old in my family (close to 3½ to be precise) is often being a dinosaur. She isn't being bad mooded when she 'roars' and extends her fingers like 'dinosaur claws'. Nobody else is even playing her game with her. She just does it when she feels like it. She thinks it is funny, and likes it.

I think sometimes people forget how a 3 year old plays. Or maybe their 3 year old didn't play in a similar way.
Our 3 year old is also now growing long and lean, unlike her recent chubby toddler face. Not being starved or maltreated. I see a lot of her, and know this.

imo

I agree SthAussie. Every child has their own personality and generally speaking boys and girls do in fact play quite differently and show clear preferences for different toys and types of play. That’s why the last photos of W stood out to me in that L was set up with all the things little girls like to play with and yet there was nothing there for W to keep him entertained. As a parent of 3, a girl and 2 boys, I worked that out very quickly. Not sure why fm didn’t have any toys set up on the back veranda for W only she can answer that question. It seems somewhat cruel that the only toy W would most likely be interested in playing with being the Spider-Man toy, was with his sister wrapped in a blanket and not with him. So I can see why W was bored, perhaps frustrated and how in those circumstances accidents can easily happen
Anyway IMO the fm has the best of the best legal team representing her so I don’t see any future charges relating to Ws disappearance coming her way anytime soon or ever

 

[SouthAussie]

I agree SthAussie. Every child has their own personality and generally speaking boys and girls do in fact play quite differently and show clear preferences for different toys and types of play. That’s why the last photos of W stood out to me in that L was set up with all the things little girls like to play with and yet there was nothing there for W to keep him entertained. As a parent of 3, a girl and 2 boys, I worked that out very quickly. Not sure why fm didn’t have any toys set up on the back veranda for W only she can answer that question. It seems somewhat cruel that the only toy W would most likely be interested in playing with being the Spider-Man toy, was with his sister wrapped in a blanket and not with him. So I can see why W was bored, perhaps frustrated and how in those circumstances accidents can easily happen
Anyway IMO the fm has the best of the best legal team representing her so I don’t see any future charges relating to Ws disappearance coming her way anytime soon or ever

Not everyone is perfect, Chrissy.

For all we know, the sister brought out her own toy stroller and William didn't bring out anything. Or maybe he brought out a spiderman toy (I can't actually tell what doll is under the washcloth).
They are both set up with water bottles and colouring stuff to make their cards for their grandfather's grave.

imo

 

[BoysTown]

When my son was 3 he never played with toys. He prefered kitchen objects, sticks or the like.

Deducing that he was bored and that FM was a bad parent because she didn’t set him up with toys (from one photo) is a stretch. IMO

 

[drsleuth]

I agree SthAussie. Every child has their own personality and generally speaking boys and girls do in fact play quite differently and show clear preferences for different toys and types of play. That’s why the last photos of W stood out to me in that L was set up with all the things little girls like to play with and yet there was nothing there for W to keep him entertained. As a parent of 3, a girl and 2 boys, I worked that out very quickly. Not sure why fm didn’t have any toys set up on the back veranda for W only she can answer that question. It seems somewhat cruel that the only toy W would most likely be interested in playing with being the Spider-Man toy, was with his sister wrapped in a blanket and not with him. So I can see why W was bored, perhaps frustrated and how in those circumstances accidents can easily happen
Anyway IMO the fm has the best of the best legal team representing her so I don’t see any future charges relating to Ws disappearance coming her way anytime soon or ever

BMB : Or just maybe there is no evidence of the FFC being involved in William's disappearance IMO, despite NSWPF throwing everything at her over years ( Bugging of home & car for over a year, re-enactments, NSW CC, Coroners Court , The BIG digs, The FGM car etc etc ) I wonder what the Coroner thinks of all that??

They dragged the inquest out by years , with nothing to show in the end?

One could say, NSWPF strung the Coroner along even IMO

They asked for the DPP to suspend looking into the FFC until the inquest was done & dusted.

No new evidence was presented at the inquest ( the public parts anyway ) & we know that Coroner Harriet Graham declined twice to hear further testimony from the FFC

Will be interesting to see what the DPP does now...........

I don't really expect the findings until around mid year, the Coroner will need time to go thru all the submissions IMO

 

[FromGermany1]

When I said "slightly bad mooded" little W, I thought also of things, we heard: This morning he had had a struggle with his foster mother, because he didn't want the dressing she wanted. When the siblings drove their bicycles in the driveway, he threw his bike into the flowerbed. The children (and I assume: mainly little W as the younger one) were so exhausting, that FFC had to assure her husband, that she would take the children off his hands, so that he could get ready in peace. What else there was with family disagreements, I have forgotten after 10 long years. My impression was, that 3yo little W didn't have his best morning. Otherwise I would ask myself, why the FGM early in the morning already called little W a "little devil".
I'm an old mother of one girl and two boys, which were (and are, haha) not always easy to care for.

 

[SouthAussie]

When I said "slightly bad mooded" little W, I thought also of things, we heard: This morning he had had a struggle with his foster mother, because he didn't want the dressing she wanted. When the siblings drove their bicycles in the driveway, he threw his bike into the flowerbed. The children (and I assume: mainly little W as the younger one) were so exhausting, that FFC had to assure her husband, that she would take the children off his hands, so that he could get ready in peace. What else there was with family disagreements, I have forgotten after 10 long years. My impression was, that 3yo little W didn't have his best morning. Otherwise I would ask myself, why the FGM early in the morning already called little W a "little devil".
I'm an old mother of one girl and two boys, which were (and are, haha) not always easy to care for.

No, William didn't have his best morning. He sadly disappeared.

I think the FM explained their morning never imagining that some people would be so misunderstanding about normal family things. Otherwise, there would have been is a lot of little details that she didn't have to provide. (like shirt under spiderman outfit - encouraging a young child to add something warmer, kids arguing over toys, for example)

As Dan Box said in one of his early podcast episodes, this case quickly became (on social media) about parenting styles.

imo

 

[FromGermany1]

No, William didn't have his best morning. He sadly disappeared.

I think the FM explained their morning never imagining that some people would be so misunderstanding about normal family things. Otherwise, there would have been is a lot of little details that she didn't have to provide. (like shirt under spiderman outfit - encouraging a young child to add something warmer, kids arguing over toys, for example)

As Dan Box said in one of his early podcast episodes, this case quickly became (on social media) about parenting styles.

imo

FFC provided a lot of details.

 

[SouthAussie]

FFC provided a lot of details.

Exactly my point.

 

[Lemony]

Deputy State Coroner Harriet Grahame has ordered counsel assisting the inquiry to file submissions by February 28, while the police commissioner's are due by April 29.
All other submissions must be filed by May 30, before responses are handed up by June 13.

The coroner will then set down a date to deliver her findings.

Inquest into disappearance of William Tyrrell reaching its end

www.9news.com.au

 

[iiiii's]

The Crabbs did report hearing a car (turning around in the gravel) They assumed it was the postie.

It is mentioned in Episode 5 of the Witness Podcast.

Could have been the car the FM claimed to have seen doing a turn in the neighbours driveway, that initially had been described as grey/green, (a similar description of the car the FF was driving) and then was reported as being teal. Or it could have been when the FM left to look for WT.

I think the inquest has spent considerable time looking at FA. I don't think the Coroner takes the evidence against him lightly. Remember when she (presumably) ordered the search of his residence location DURING the inquest?

I agree that NSWPOL have not spent nearly enough time on him. In one of Jubes' books he said that they couldn't place FA at Benaroon Drive. But it seems that they haven't been able to place him NOT at Benaroon Drive either.

I think it is very suss that FA's phone didn't move for 3 days when William disappeared. A person with as much form as him would know that the police look at your phone movements. Where was he during those 3 days?

BBM
We don't use that logic in Australia's law system, (prove you weren't there) ( prove your innocence). The impetus is on the police to prove he was there, with evidence. Otherwise, you could pick any crim with the same rap sheet, who can't remember where they were at the time of WT's disappearance, and say the same thing about them. It's called rounding up the usual suspects.

 

[SouthAussie]

We don't use that logic in Australia's law system, (prove you weren't there) ( prove your innocence). The impetus is on the police to prove he was there, with evidence. Otherwise, you could pick any crim with the same rap sheet, who can't remember where they were at the time of WT's disappearance, and say the same thing about them. It's called rounding up the usual suspects.

The point I was making is that the Coroner has heard a lot of circumstantial evidence against FA, and they haven't been able to establish his whereabouts when William disappeared ... nor did his phone move for 3 days at the time.

It was not about his rap sheet.

Via Mr Craddock, they were trying to establish if there is a likelihood that he is involved. There is an important deathbed confession involving FA.

I recall way back when that the police were trying to track the movements of RP's vehicle. And Mr Craddock was inquiring about what other vehicles FA had access to.

imo

 

[iiiii's]

The point I was making is that the Coroner has heard a lot of circumstantial evidence against FA, and they haven't been able to establish his whereabouts when William disappeared ... nor did his phone move for 3 days at the time.

It was not about his rap sheet.

Via Mr Craddock, they were trying to establish if there is a likelihood that he is involved. There is an important deathbed confession involving FA.

I recall way back when that the police were trying to track the movements of RP's vehicle. And Mr Craddock was inquiring about what other vehicles FA had access to.

imo

Well there may well be more to hear about his status. He said at the last tranche that he had been informed that he was no longer a POI and had asked for that to be provided in writing by the police, which it hadn't at that date. He said he wanted to provide the coroner with some evidence and she said that someone would assist him with that. He wasn't called to the stand, if he provided some evidence it wasn't announced in court that the other lawyers had received a copy of that evidence. He did not apply for a certificate to give evidence on grounds that it may incriminate him so I think that concept is purely speculative and the coroner ended the hearing of evidence. The only indications of what the coroner may be thinking before handing down her findings may be if we hear of further police searches through the media. MOO

 

[SouthAussie]

He did not apply for a certificate to give evidence on grounds that it may incriminate him ....

My understanding is that we don't know this. It was not discussed at the inquest.
My understanding also is that journos may not be able to report about people applying for a Sec 61 certificate. Maybe because it might be seen as prejudicial. IDK

Possibly we will find out in the Coroners Findings, if she includes it there.

imo

 

[iiiii's]

My understanding is that we don't know this. It was not discussed at the inquest.
My understanding also is that journos may not be able to report about people applying for a Sec 61 certificate. Maybe because it might be seen as prejudicial. IDK

Possibly we will find out in the Coroners Findings, if she includes it there.

imo

My understanding is that in the coroner's court, it is trying to be as transparent as possible. I have seen other proceedings in NSW and when the POI is called to the stand, the POI tells the coroner that they are applying for a certificate. It is still up to the coroner whether they grant it or not. Obviously they often do grant it if they can see in the case file that there seems to be substantial case evidence against that person. That person is then setting themselves up as a major point of focus for more investigation. I don't believe the coroner would have put a blanket over such a process happening to another POI in this case and no journalist has speculated that this is a possibility. You can watch the documentary of Belinda Peisley's coronial inquest to see the process I outlined above, in action. https://www.youtube.com/show/SCspCw9d3GzTDWa5WEPzu5sQ?season=1&sbp=CgEx

Actually, it would have been good if he had been called. There are no really good reasons for why the coroner didn't call him if there is so much circumstantial evidence against him. He either could have applied for a certificate, outlining he should be looked at further or if he wanted to defend himself further on the stand, there would have been lots of opportunities for him to have slipped up with quite a number of solicitors present at the court, who I'm sure would have wanted to x examine anything he had to say. Looks like a very lost opportunity unless they don't think he is responsible or the way evidence was collected about him proves to be questionable. I also think a lot of time was taken into investigating him before the inquest began. MOO

 

[SouthAussie]

My understanding is that in the coroner's court, it is trying to be as transparent as possible. I have seen other proceedings in NSW and when the POI is called to the stand, the POI tells the coroner that they are applying for a certificate. It is still up to the coroner whether they grant it or not. Obviously they often do grant it if they can see in the case file that there seems to be substantial case evidence against that person. That person is then setting themselves up as a major point of focus for more investigation. I don't believe the coroner would have put a blanket over such a process happening to another POI in this case and no journalist has speculated that this is a possibility. You can watch the documentary of Belinda Peisley's coronial inquest to see the process I outlined above, in action. https://www.youtube.com/show/SCspCw9d3GzTDWa5WEPzu5sQ?season=1&sbp=CgEx

Actually, it would have been good if he had been called. There are no really good reasons for why the coroner didn't call him if there is so much circumstantial evidence against him. He either could have applied for a certificate, outlining he should be looked at further or if he wanted to defend himself further on the stand, there would have been lots of opportunities for him to have slipped up with quite a number of solicitors present at the court, who I'm sure would have wanted to x examine anything he had to say. Looks like a very lost opportunity unless they don't think he is responsible or the way evidence was collected about him proves to be questionable. I also think a lot of time was taken into investigating him before the inquest began. MOO

There were also a lot of closed court sessions, and we don't know what went on in them. Not quite as transparent as hoped, as we can't be sure who wasn't called to give evidence.

And as @JBowie said, if we had publicly heard from FA it would have been a pack of lies anyway.
He has already wangled his way out of a murder conviction, has abused who knows how many children, and we aren't allowed to know the circumstances of his little son's death.

imo

 

[iiiii's]

There were also a lot of closed court sessions, and we don't know what went on in them. Not quite as transparent as hoped, as we can't be sure who wasn't called to give evidence.

And as @JBowie said, if we had publicly heard from FA it would have been a pack of lies anyway.
He has already wangled his way out of a murder conviction, has abused who knows how many children, and we aren't allowed to know the circumstances of his little son's death.

imo

I truly think that if a certificate had been issued to a POI during the inquest and was suppressed, it could not have helped but leak, even anecdotally. There are too many parties involved in this process whose interests, that information would serve. Journalists would be talking around the subject in articles, e.g. "explosive information during inquest that is unlawful to publish puts different complexion on different POI"

We may all assume, FA has gone away forever, but he might still be harbouring some hope of getting out. He still had a lot to lose if he was put on the stand either by being done for perjury if he lied during evidence or applying for a certificate, making him the main suspect. Lost opportunity.... MOO

 

[marv hucker]

N

I truly think that if a certificate had been issued to a POI during the inquest and was suppressed, it could not have helped but leak, even anecdotally. There are too many parties involved in this process whose interests, that information would serve. Journalists would be talking around the subject in articles, e.g. "explosive information during inquest that is unlawful to publish puts different complexion on different POI"

We may all assume, FA has gone away forever, but he might still be harbouring some hope of getting out. He still had a lot to lose if he was put on the stand either by being done for perjury if he lied during evidence or applying for a certificate, making him the main suspect. Lost opportunity.... MOO

NSWPOL would still have to action any finding/evidence/recommendation. Which would mean admitting “not a bluff” was a bluff and writing off the millions spent barking up the wrong tree.

Not a done deal.

 

[iiiii's]

N

NSWPOL would still have to action any finding/evidence/recommendation. Which would mean admitting “not a bluff” was a bluff and writing off the millions spent barking up the wrong tree.

Not a done deal.

I don't think they care. They didn't say they were not bluffing as far as I am aware to the media, they said it to a suspect. Whatever their tactic, the drive and unaccounted timeframe prompted the Coroner to order the search along Batar Creek Rd. in the area the FM said she drove to, after hearing evidence and seeing holes in the FM's story. MOO

 

[SouthAussie]

IIRC the Coroner ordered the 2018 forensic search to try to make sure that William didn't lose himself.
And she ordered the 2020 search at Herons Creek due to the evidence against Frank Abbott.
And she ordered the 2021 search of Batar Creek Road due to the direction of Laidlaw's focus.

She would have been remiss not to do those things. Everything possible must be ruled in or ruled out.

What has been missed? What clue is in those police files that might establish what actually happened to William?

Has everyone who needs to be fully investigated in fact been fully investigated?